Written evidence from Harrogate District
Community Transport Scheme Limited (Little Red Bus) (BUS 115)
INTRODUCTION
Harrogate District Community Transport Scheme Limited,
(Little Red Bus), established in 1986 is a social enterprise.
It is an Industrial and Provident Society registered with and
regulated by the FSA.
1. We have no political affiliations and do not
support any particular vested interests.
2. Little Red Bus primary aim is to improve quality
of life through the provision of transport services for the benefit
of the community by:
Working
to develop sustainable communities,
Promoting
social inclusion,
Providing
or ensuring connectivity to work, leisure, health and social care,
and
Enhancing
environmental performance.
The organisation has continued to progress a planned
programme of development, facilitated by the award of the Futurebuilders
funding package that was made available in May 2006.
Futurebuilders Programme involves working in partnership
with other community transport partners to increase the capacity
of the organisations in order to enable the sustainable expansion
of community transport. The ultimate objectives of this growth
are to:
Achieve
improved community cohesion by connecting people across the county.
Enable
statutory agencies to improve access to services and, thereby,
achieve best value.
Increase
the numbers of people attending health care, thereby enabling
a better quality of life.
Enable
older people to live independent lives.
Provide
access to social and recreational facilities for young people
in order to reduce the incidence of anti-social behaviour.
Increase
the numbers of people accessing educational facilities; eg school
children utilizing Extended School Hours provision.
Enable
the long term unemployed to access work and training opportunities.
Enable
low income families to undertake day to day activities to the
advantage of their health; eg accessing supermarkets and sports
and leisure facilities.
The organisation has consistently grown and in 2009-10
achieved a turnover of £1.7 million. It has used investments
from Futurebuilders England, Local authorities, various government
initiatives including Rural Bus Challenge, Rural Transport Partnerships
and earned income to develop an independent integrated transport
centre using the latest technology and a range different size
vehicles and community car schemes to operate, a range of transport
services flexibly and in response to local need. The aim is make
efficiencies by breaking down barriers between the silos of transport
funding agencies that are responsible for different services for
the same communities at different but often the same time. Also
to provide a network that supports commercial operators where
they exist and to fill the gaps where they do not.
CUTS AND
THEIR AFFECT
LRB has been severely affected by the cuts to services
and budget allocation to transport services in North Yorkshire.
For several years we have been developing packages
of work particularly in rural areas that included home to school
transport, local bus service demand responsive services and group
trips which enabled the passenger subsidy maximum of £7.50
to be reduced to £4.31 in very rural and isolated communities
This subsidy was also reducing as spare capacity was available
and local communities were gaining confidence and relying more
on public/community transport.
This has now been destroyed by NYCC Integrated Passenger
Transport Unit without any consultation and in fact the local
community partnership which has been growing since 2005 has been
deliberately undermined in order to obtain immediate budget cuts
and severe cuts in local transport services and community confidence.
Other similar services around North Yorkshire have
been weakened or completely cut in order to make instant budget
cuts.
In many cases bus services and other local authority
or health services have been withdrawn and people told to contact
"Little Red Bus". Little Red Bus has not been consulted
or offered any support to provide these extra services. In one
instance a large GP consortia moved to a joint headquarters and
their brochure informed people to use Little Red Bus services
if they could not access the surgery. Millions of pounds were
spent on this project but at no time were we consulted.
CONCESSIONARY FARES
The extension of concessionary fares to community
transport services would support the most vulnerable in areas
where there is no public transport or access is difficult. This
could be supported by introducing a nominal fare with a concessionary
fare pass which seems to be acceptable to the majority of people.
LACK OF
CONSULTATION, STRATEGIC
PLANNING
Whilst the need for savings and efficiencies is accepted
the lack of consultation or understanding of community links is
of more concern.
An understanding of the need or attempt to use the
knowledge understanding and skills of operators, users and relevant
local authority departments would significantly improve the level
of service provided.
The lack of this leads to inflexibility extra cost
mistrust between stakeholders and a single solution for a range
of different problems.
Transparency and accountability with a jointly accepted
strategic approach with agreed priorities seems a fairly obvious
solution but the lack of this has led to the catastrophic cuts
affecting the lives of people who cannot now get to work or access
services. In the case of an individual wishing to get to hospital,
work or for shopping the difference can be £24.00 for a taxi
or £2.50 in a little red bus which may now not be available.
The recent award to NYCC of £415,000 for community
transport could enable some of the effects of the cuts to be limited
as the inability to plan services is a major factor prohibiting
the sustainable development of community transport providers in
North Yorkshire.
Unfortunately these funds are not ring fenced and
the current system of funding operated by IPTU appears to be random
and not subject to consultation. Various reviews, strategies and
plans for Community Transport In North Yorkshire have been developed
by NYCC Integrated Passenger Transport Unit (IPTU) since 2004
but there is very little evidence of any change or consideration
of the consultation process. Referral to these documents in order
to attempt changes is usually referred to as "history"
and "not relevant now". Inevitably there is then another
expensive review which supports procrastination, and the resumption
of status quo.
As a result community transport providers and other
stakeholders find it difficult to plan their operations and prepare
meaningful budgets. Some CT operators try to support communities
from contracted local authority services which are generally commercially
competitative and allocated on an individual and non strategic
basis. This makes it very difficult to support expensive non commercial
community services without subsidy.
The lack of a county wide strategic approach by NYCC
Integrated Passenger Transport Unit (IPTU) and outcomes based
on agreed performance indicators mean that the IPTU allocate funding
on an "as and when" basis to individual organisations
on an "ad hoc" basis.
The lack of transparency or agreed system of accountability
or monitoring does not encourage partnership between community
transport operators but can lead to an environment of suspicion.
This strategy could be interpreted as a way of preventing strong
partnerships from developing which could be seen as a threat to
local authority power and jobs which is the opposite to the Localism
agenda and counter productive to the aims of avoiding duplication,
shared resources and achieving efficiencies.
It is not suggested that NYCC are unique in this
approach and that the IPTU based on the lack of guidance, national
policies, historical status and achievements of the community
transport sector are entirely to blame for the situation.
Community Transport as a creditable player is a recent
phenomena and therefore may have been difficult to accept as part
of budget negotiating... Community transport has been seen as
a cheap option based on volunteers and in some places this opinion
still prevails. The development of some community transport providers
into the contract culture has enabled the sector to raise its
profile and be included in the transport network as a key connector
in the transport network.
The dilemmas and issues need to be discussed and
addressed. The Local Transport Bill went some way towards assisting
this and the impact is slowly becoming apparent.
Local authorities must decide if they want community
transport and understand what it can offer, how much, at what
level and at what cost. Meaningful comparisons between in house,
community commercial and a strategic partnership of all can be
debated and consulted on and the outcomes shared. Then it may
be easier for these services to be considered as a part of the
transport solutions and budgets and will enable transport officers
to develop the consultation and planning process required.
COMMUNITY TRANSPORT
AS A
SOLUTION
Community transport is now recognised as being part
of the solution but it must be allowed to join up become a part
of the transport network. It should be included in concessionary
fare scheme but also operate under quality standards.
CT can prove to be a costly solution in terms of
human resources due to administration of scheduling and control
functions. This can be effectively resolved by the use of the
hub concept as proposed in the Futurebuilders Little red Bus Network
Model and the Dales Integrated Alliance Project. Core scheduling
services can be operated using a web based system with local connections
that will also provide administrative, technical, financial, monitoring
and recording services. 24 hour service can be provided as all
local providers can be "off service" and the Hub will
respond. Hub will contract larger and cross sector contracts to
be delivered locally and local providers will also remain independent
and work with their local communities to provide demand responsive
and supplementary local solutions.
Local organisations working with local communities
can provide more services and at reduced cost the Dales and Bowland
Community Interest Company have reduced subsidies by over half
and increased patronage by over 50% in only two years and by providing
weekend services improved the local rural economy by increasing
tourist numbers whilst at the same time reducing the carbon footprint
in the Yorkshire Dales.
Solutions are readily available if consultation is
used effectively and users, operators and other stakeholders are
accepted as real partners.
April 2011
|